IRS going after Baptist preacher

This nation was founded with the voice of power and government held by the people. We are not a monarchy. We are not a dictatorship. We have elections, we have lawmakers, we have executives to carry out the law and leadership of government on our behalf, and we have courts to judge the people and the law and to administer justice...... But the authority to rule originates in the people..... or more precisely, in the authority of our constitution.

Jesus did preach against the politics of his day: He preached regarding the corruption of the established institutions of his day. While one may say that he didn't speak against the Roman Rule: In truth, the Romans were occupiers, but for the most part left the finer points of rule to the Jewish leaders of his day..... and these were the ones that he verbally reproached because of their hyprocrasy, injustice, corruption and manipulation.

There is much that the Bible has to say about treaties, allegiances, bribes, friends, enemies, the value of instruction, the respect of authority, the ruthlessness of leaders, about law and justice, about the weak and the strong, the poor and the rich, about charity and hard work, about morality, about the rights to own property, about the problems with debt, usuary, and covetousness, the duty to protect one's family and the preservation of borders, about the care of the land, the sowing of the field, the gathering of the harvest, the management of contagion, the disposal of waste, the sanctity of life, the care for one's neighbor, the treatment of animals, etc......
There is wisdom in the socialogy, the psychology, the political science, the foreign affairs, the affairs of state, the institutions of justice, the environmental concerns, the food supply and distribution, the rewards of labor and ownership, the methods of providing charity........ aren't all these things part of the processes of political differences..... and the Bible speaks with clarity if one really finds its words are faithful.... However, these are often things left for the individual to ferret out. The pulpits of America no longer ring true with clear Bibical instruction. If the instruction was clearer, and the reproof bolder for offenses, the people would have a better understanding of what not to vote for, and those leaders which come out of our 'Christian' churches, would have a clearer understanding with which to judge when they are making 'good law' vs bad, and when they are coming under influencial snares and be able to exercise greater wisdom and justice in their responsibilities.

But we don't want the truth: Our preachers would be unemployed if they preached it. We'd 'fire them. Our ears itch for the flattering words and indulgent speach. While professing gossip to judge another and our partcular esthetic abhorrance of certain ways, we turn on the t.v. and are entertained by the corruption it places before our eyes and grow insensitive to the ravishing of innocent minds of the children who watch the same smut that we do. We like our sin: We want acceptance when we shack up with another sister or brother before we're ready for commitment. We like our appetites, our indulgences, our glutony (I'm 'preaching' as much to myself as anyone), our passions, our egos, our recognition, our honor. Instead of sorrowing and repentance for sin, we want understanding, sympathy, and tolerance. And we feel much better about ourselves when our leaders mirror our own faults.

Nay, not only do we feel better, we take delight in their corruptions which remind us of ourselves....or make us 'feel' better than them......... its an equalizer. ..........and no one reminds us that they who compare themselves among themselves are not wise.

 

Can't disagree with you Windcatcher.

 

Too bad Jesus didn't know that. And answer my previous question: would you chase somebody out with a whip if they did start talking politics in church?

 

Well sir , Jesus did know that.
Now this whip thing you are talking about, no I wouldn't but it would be known that I find it repulsive to discuss personal politics in God's house.
Now let me ask you a question.
A person is on the verge of recieving Jesus as his saviour but the topic for the day is supporting candidate "A" for president. Now lets say this person was really looking forward to some inspirational message that would persuade him to take that step but politics takes a front seat for the day. How would you feel to come so close to bringing a peson so close to recieving Christ only to lose him because politics takes a front seat.
To me it is not worth the risk to offend someone and then lose them after they have come so close.
The Churches priorities should be made clear that we are here to do God's will and let politics be discussed somewhere else.

 

Whether you like it or not, Jesus did criticize the goals and teachings of political parties. Was Jesus wrong to use the whip, or are you right to not use it? And exactly how would you let it be known that you consider it so nasty to discuss politics in "God's house" [no scripture calls a church facility 'God's house', and indeed there is no instruction to build them].

You don't really ask a question here, but there's no better way to respond to your hypothetical case than an equally valid example. If that person "A" who is on the brink of making a decision for Christ, happens to have an occasional glass of wine, and the sermon is a scathing condemnation of drinking any amount of alcohol whatsoever, and he therefore postpones that decision and ends up never comng back... should there be no anti-alcohol sermons? Or at least as likely, if A has been in deep financial trouble, perhaps filing for bankrupcy, and has made an agreement to pay off his debts with virtually everything he earns, and the sermon is about a tithe, and more than a tithe, being required of him if he is a "real" believer... (same thing).

Politics may turn somebody off, but it's far from the only subject that may. We were actually talking about discussing politics within church, rather than having a sermon about it, but the concept here still applies.

 

I believe I recall correctly many of the meeting about us breaking away from England were held in churches. Patrick Henry great little speech was help in a church ar Church Hill district of Richmond, Va.
I believe if one takes the time they will see the church house has been used in politics for years. I know as a teen I had seen men running for governor speak at local churches. I believe even Bill Clinton was known to speak at a few churches when he was running for office. I recall Jessie Jackson speaking a some churches while running for office.
I believe it has been in our culture for a long time. I know today with so many it is seen as not being correct, but I've seen it my entire life to this point, less today than yesterday.
But I've never seen anyone take Sunday service to back someone, but I'm sure it has been done.

 

I am not a Mike Huckabee supporter but I can say to Mike Huckabee's credit that as he preaches in churches along the campaign trail, his politics takes a back seat to the preaching of the of the word of God. I will also say it takes a certain amount of integrity to do so and to put one's self above others such as Jesse Jackson who will use the pulpit to influence others how to vote. History does not make past situations in churches correct. In the situation about breaking away from England I don't see that as a political situation but more of a moral and ethical decision and certainly it wasn't about endorsing a candidate. Church and religeous leaders are every bit as capable of making bad calls on which candidates to support.
I doubt that George Bush was truely annointed by God to be our President but to have heard how other Christian leaders had built him up you would have to wonder if that is what these leaders would have you believe.

And Alcott, you did a great job of evading a direct response to my question. I was honest a fair with my response to your question.

 

P-O, you did not in fact ask a question. I can presume your interrogation from the hypothetical case you presented, and say: No, we should not lose someone because of a politically based sermon and/or prevalent theme among the congregation. Now, answer my question, which actually was a question with one of these "?".

 

You are correct here and at work and among friends or anywhere, but good calls have also been made.

I think a lot has to do with the culture one comes out of, if it is accepted or not.

I will agree that the church should spend most of its time getting the Gospel out and teaching sound doctrine. But in most churches that I've been around we have talked about everything from politics to sports to what to eat and the list goes on and on. What one believes will reflect on every point of their life.

For my part on politics, I don't think church is the best place but the culture I came up in, church was were we talked about every part of life. We held farmer meets at church, water problems at church, being a better parent, all parts of life were talked about and plans were made at the church house. Church was the center of our rural life.